Download Movement: Paradoxes of First Nations Inclusion in the Canadian

Social Inclusion | 2013 | Volume 1 | Issue 1 | Pages 21–36
DOI: 10.12924/si2013.01010021
Research Article
The "Idle No More" Movement: Paradoxes of First Nations
Inclusion in the Canadian Context
Terry Wotherspoon* and John Hansen
Department of Sociology, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0E8, Canada;
E-Mails: [email protected] (T.W.); [email protected] (J.H.); Tel.: +1 3069666925 (T.W.);
Fax: +1 3069666950 (T.W.)
* Corresponding author
Submitted: 14 April 2013 | In revised form: 2 June 2013 | Accepted: 27 June 2013 |
Published: 18 July 2013
Abstract: Idle No More, a recent protest movement initiated to draw attention to concerns by
Indigenous people and allies about changes in Canada's environment and economic policies, has
also raised awareness about social and economic conditions experienced by much of Canada's
Indigenous population. While discourses and policies oriented to social inclusion are not as prominent in Canada as in Europe and several other contexts, these conditions and the strategies
adopted by governments to address them are consistent with narrowly-framed inclusion policies.
We provide an overview of what these conditions represent and how they have come to be
framed in the context of the Idle No More movement. However, we extend our analysis to understand how the Idle No More movement and discourses of inclusion and exclusion alike have often
been framed in ways that further limit solutions to the problems that they are oriented to resolve
by stigmatizing and distancing Indigenous people, especially when they ignore or undermine distinct Indigenous rights and the foundations of formal Aboriginal status. We draw upon Indigenous
concepts of justice and critical analyses of power relations in order to explore the contradictory
locations and experiences associated with Indigenous inclusion in the Canadian context. We conclude by exploring the movement's contributions to broadened conceptions of inclusion that build
upon alternative conceptions of socioeconomic participation and success.
Keywords: Indigenous people; social exclusion; social inclusion; social inequality
1. Introduction
News media in Canada and many other nations were
replete with images in late 2012 and early 2013 of Indigenous people and their allies engaged in public rallies,
flash mobs, marches, and occasional blockades that
disrupted highway and rail traffic. Media exposure and
public interest in the movement known as "Idle No
More" (sometimes also referred to as "Canada's Native
winter" in a nod to the "Arab spring" events) reached its
© 2013 by the authors; licensee Librello, Switzerland. This open access article was published
under a Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
peak in mid-January with events leading to high level
talks between a delegation of First Nations leaders and
the nation's Prime Minister and senior cabinet members. These events became the focus of international
attention, drawing support and media coverage of environmental and Indigenous issues around the world
while encouraging parallel rallies and protests in the
United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and several
other places. While the outcome was somewhat anticlimactic—entailing a commitment by government
leaders to hold further talks to recognize and modernize the terms of historical treaties signed between
First Nations and the crown (represented by Canada's
Governor General, who met separately with members
from the First Nations delegation)—the entire scenario
played out as political theatre that alternatively captivated and puzzled much of its audience.
These events, and the debates and controversies
surrounding them, drew attention to many profound
issues associated with the status and conditions of
Canada's Indigenous people. Adding to a long series of
grievances and frustrations about inattention to longstanding problems, concerns were mounting that
recently announced government policies that could further undermine conditions in many Indigenous communities were implemented without measures to
secure adequate representation and dialogue with
members of these communities. In the tense and
uncertain build-up to the top level meetings, attention
was focused especially on a high profile hunger strike
led by Theresa Spence, a Chief from a northern Ontario
First Nation community seeking action to address poor
housing conditions, lack of running water, inadequate
sewage, and other major and longstanding problems.
While the media focus and surrounding public conversations about the movement heightened awareness of
matters about which many Canadians had little knowledge, they also drew attention away from or distorted
and misrepresented many of the core issues as participants with diverse interests came to position themselves through attempts to set the agenda or steer
developments in ways that aligned with their own
interests. The specific origins of the movement called
Idle No More lay with concerns about broader contemporary fiscal and environmental issues relevant to Indigenous and non-Indigenous people alike, but the roots
of the movement extended back several generations.
The Idle No More movement is significant for giving
focus to the complex phenomenon of social inclusion
and its implications for Indigenous people in the Canadian context. In particular, the challenges to define and
achieve what it means for Indigenous people to maintain Indigenous rights (formally defined as Aboriginal
rights in Canada) as well as their identities as Indigenous people while gaining meaningful participation in
the political, social and economic life of the Canadian
nation take place within a multidimensional and often
highly volatile landscape. This paper explores the emergence of and public reactions to the Idle No More
movement as both a response to processes of exclusion that have posed historic and contemporary limits
to the opportunities available to much of the Indigenous population to become fully incorporated into
Canadian society and as a struggle by diverse groups
and interests to redefine and re-establish the bases
on which such inclusion may be achieved.
It is crucial to locate processes of inclusion and
exclusion, in these respects, within a framework that
takes into account practices and legacies associated
with colonization as well as the struggles to define
and realize the distinct legal status and rights of Indigenous people. This means that, while attention
needs to be given to problems associated with full
inclusion of much of the Indigenous population with
respect to conventional indicators such as education,
housing or employment, several distinctive features of
the Indigenous experience require a more nuanced
understanding than can be offered through conventional discourses and objectives related to inclusion.
Full and equitable inclusion within Canadian society
cannot occur without fulfilling the nation to nation relationship between Indigenous people and Canadian governments outlined in historic treaties and subsequent
legislation. In presenting our analysis, we draw from
and contrast alternative discourses presented by Indigenous scholars, elders, and community representatives, government documents, and representations of
Indigenous people and Idle No More in mass media
and popular accounts. We adopt elements of Pierre
Bourdieu's analytical framework, highlighting especially how the diverse places occupied by Indigenous
people within Canadian society are influenced by symbolic violence and interactions influenced by unequal
allocations of social, cultural and economic resources
and power. Inclusion, understood in this way, requires
awareness of the diverse and often contradictory realities and significance associated with the Indigenous
experience within the Canadian context. We acknowledge the contemporary dimensions of Idle No More
as a fluid, dynamic social movement which is, at the
same time, deeply connected with the quest to validate and realize longstanding notions of Indigenous
justice and law. We begin with a description of the
roots and aims of the Idle No More Movement, understood from Indigenous perspectives, before proceeding to more detailed analysis of the various forms
of social exclusion and struggles for inclusion in the
Canadian context.
2. Idle No More Roots and Aims
The Idle No More movement is widely interpreted to be
a contemporary movement. However, while the movement of that specific name is relatively recent, it is
grounded in longstanding historical roots located within
struggles to define and maintain Indigenous identity
and foster effective Indigenous nationhood [1]. Its core
vision is articulated in terms of objectives to work with
22
allies to recognize First Nations sovereignty and nationhood and to employ an effective nation to nation relationship to foster social justice and protect the
environment and lands in a respectful way [2].
It represents much more than the events and activities taking place under that specific label. Its most
immediate roots lie with an initiative undertaken not by
formal Indigenous leaders, but from unofficial leaders—
three Indigenous women and one non-Indigenous
woman in Saskatchewan—in the course of discussing
how their concerns about recent measures hidden in
massive budget legislation could be translated into
action. Their stance against provisions contained within
Bill C-45 (a massive piece of supplementary budget
legislation introduced to Parliament by Canada's federal
government in early 2012), communicated through
social media and connections among communities,
awakened the people and alerted them to commitments to fundamental responsibilities.
The movement is important because it is rooted in
old Indigenous laws that speak of our duty to protect
the water and land for the future generations. It marks
the re-awakening of an Indigenous tradition and culture grounded in respect for the environment, fostering
resistance to the kinds of exploitation of land and water
conveyed through many of the terms of Bill C-45. The
legislation is widely described and denounced by critics
as an omnibus budget bill because it contained, in
addition to fiscal provisions, an extensive series of
changes to more than sixty federal acts and regulations, including the Indian Act and other legislative provisions that affect lands and resources in Indigenous
territories. The Bill, as suggested in its title, The Jobs
and Growth Act, 2012, prioritizes the government's
commitment to economic initiatives in part by removing
what it considers barriers to development [3]. Many of
the provisions of the legislation, including those that
affected Indigenous people and their lands and
resources, appeared, without prior notice, embedded
within a comprehensive 450 page document. The
changes and the manner in which they were imposed
by the federal government violated principles of consultation and relations with the environment fundamental to Indigenous rights and heritage. Although
significant in its own right, the legislation reinforced a
pattern in which the government has ignored more
formal obligations, including those specified in Articles
19 and 32 of the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples to consult and cooperate
with indigenous people in order to secure their free and
informed consent prior to implementing legislation or
undertaking projects that may affect Indigenous people
or their lands and resources [4,5].
Idle No More has provided a focal point that
enables contemporary Indigenous people and their
allies to connect with an aspect of Indigenous culture
that signifies a heritage designed to respect the environment and to prevent others from devastating the
natural world. Within the context of Indigenous law,
Indigenous people are unique in that they are distinct
nations (recognized formally as First Nations) within a
Western State who have their own consciousness of
law. The Indigenous way in this law entails a reciprocal
relationship with the earth, water, plants and animals;
the terms of Bill C-45, by contrast, are contrary to
these relationships, marking only one of several
instances in which the current Canadian government
has ignored the reality of those laws.
Perhaps one of the important aspects of Idle No
More is the support it has received from social justice
advocates, environmentalists and other groups. Social
media enabled the movement to gain rapid momentum
and widespread exposure while mobilizing large gatherings for many of its events. It may not be surprising to
find support from concerned environmentalist and
social justice advocates, but it does also suggest
deeper commitments that link social and ecological
justice proponents with other dimensions of Indigenous
struggles signified by Idle No More. Idle No More and
its supporters believe that it is in humanity's best
interests to protect the water and land, a struggle that
entails related support on broader fronts including Indigenous nationalist struggles for autonomy, struggles to
uphold Indigenous laws, and struggles for social, political and economic justice.
For Indigenous people, Bill C-45 represents a form
of ongoing colonialism. Idle No More is both a specific
movement and an awakening to re-engage in the
ages-old resistance against colonialism and imperialism. Intrinsic to that awakening is the people's sense
of Indigeneity and humanity that emerges from the
recognition that Bill C-45 contains provisions that are
likely to extend a colonial legacy in which Indigenous
people have encountered numerous forms of oppression and inequalities. Based on most conventional
indicators of social inclusion, much of the Indigenous
population is among the most highly excluded and disadvantaged groups in Canada. Poverty rates among
Indigenous people, overall, and especially among First
Nations people living on reserves, are well above comparable levels for the population as a whole, as are
incidences of other frequently-observed risk factors like
unemployment, low education, poor health conditions,
chronic illness and injury, suicide rates, and incarceration [6-8]. While the government has portrayed its
resource-focused economic agenda as one that promises benefits from exploration, mining for oil and gas,
and so-called development in Indigenous territories,
there is extensive evidence to demonstrate that these
benefits have not been experienced or shared equitably
with Indigenous people and their communities [9].
The sections that follow will situate these issues in
the context of historical factors and contemporary
struggles in which social exclusion experienced by
much of Canada's Indigenous population has fostered
diverse understandings about and strategies to achieve
meaningful inclusion. We examine the Idle No More
movement within the framework of a relational under23
standing of social inclusion, drawing from both
western social theory and Indigenous perspectives in
order to take into account relations of power,
inequality and discourse as advanced through a relational understanding of social inclusion and exclusion.
viduals and families living in non-reserve or urban
areas. More recently, Indigenous groups and other
observers have identified inequalities in levels of
funding and service provision as responsibilities have
been devolved from federal government to First
Nations jurisdiction. Compounding these issues, the
Indian Act and other policies imposed European models
of governance over First Nations living on reserves or
affiliated with tribal agencies, creating structures of
band and tribal government that ignore and sometimes
conflict with longstanding patterns of governance and
decision-making within Indigenous communities. These
diverse categories and relationships have resulted in
the emergence over time of several distinct organizations in which particular configurations of Indigenous
populations are represented at band, regional, provincial and territorial, national, and sectoral levels, not all
of which are recognized equally by one another or by
federal government officials.
All of these factors mean that questions about what
is meant by social inclusion, at what levels inclusion is
to be achieved, and under whose terms or claims the
meaning and nature of social inclusion comes to be
understood, are likely to produce responses or outcomes that are highly uncertain, contested, and
varied. The discourse of inclusion itself carries mixed
significance for Indigenous people given their experiences with colonization and policies that have undermined their positions within Canadian society as well
as their concerns that proposals to dismantle the
Indian Act and related legislation could pose threats
to the recognition of Indigenous knowledge, rights
and status (see, e.g., [8,10]). Because of Canada's
"long history of deeply entrenched racism," wrote the
late Howard Adams, a prominent Metis scholar, "White
supremacy, which had been propagated since the
beginning of early European imperialism, became
woven into Canadian institutions such as the church,
the schools and the courts" [11]. In addition to divergent understandings concerning the implications of
incorporation into dominant social institutions, there
are many differing perspectives within Indigenous
communities and among Indigenous scholars on the
definition of and strategies to achieve Indigenous sovereignty within a nation to nation arrangement, especially in a global context in which the very meaning of
nationhood is being challenged (see, e.g., [12-16]).
Idle No More, in the search for common ground on
many of these positions, reveals in the process the
many paradoxes and contradictions also associated
with these issues.
3. Socio-Legal Differentiation and Canada's
Indigenous Population
Before we continue the analysis, it is important to
acknowledge several factors that have contributed to
various forms of differentiation between Canada's
Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations as well as
within the Indigenous population. Indigenous people
occupy various social positions, based in part on their
distinct status (officially defined as Aboriginal people)
in relation to non-Indigenous populations and with
respect to specific categories of Aboriginal people
within the nation's constitutional and legislative frameworks. Treaties signed with the British Crown prior to
Confederation in 1867 and continuing to 1921, and subsequent comprehensive claims agreements (or "modern
treaties") with the federal government, acknowledge
the sovereignty of First Nations, as well as some Métis
populations (mixed Indigenous and European heritage
groups) and outline specific obligations of both parties
to the treaties. The Indian Act and related legislation
further defines "Indian" status and outlines rights and
responsibilities related to those with Indian status, designating roles for the federal government in key areas,
including education, social welfare, and health care
which fall within areas of provincial jurisdiction for the
general population. The Constitution Act (1982) and
Charter of Rights and Freedoms further defines and
reinforces rights for three groups of Aboriginal people,
classified as First Nations, Métis, and Inuit. Many
aspects of these legal definitions, including who is
covered within them and what entitlements or obligations they carry, are subject to periodic contestation
and revision. Frequent court challenges, political negotiation, and public protest have arisen for various
reasons in efforts to clarify and resolve issues related to
Aboriginal status (the terms and conditions of many
treaties were violated or not honoured in practice, for
instance, while negotiated treaties did not originally
cover many Indigenous territories within Canada,
leading to more recent land claims agreements and
settlement protocols; there are also disparities and
inconsistencies in the definitions, entitlements and
responsibilities associated with distinct status groups).
Resolution of these issues is further complicated by
questions about who has the authority to represent,
make decisions about, and provide programs and services for and on behalf of particular Indigenous
groups. Gaps or inadequacies in key service areas,
such as child and family welfare, education, public
sanitation, and housing, have often been perpetuated
for years because of federal and provincial disputes
over which level of government is responsible for indi-
4. Social Inclusion and the Production and
Reproduction of Social Inequality
A focus in both academic literature and policy analysis
on questions related to social inclusion has drawn
attention to the challenges posed by social inequality
and the social, economic, and political consequences
24
of social hierarchies within highly developed nations.
Goals to achieve socially inclusive societies, along with
related objectives to foster peaceful interaction, mutual
recognition, and respectful dialogue, have a universal
appeal ([17], p. 1). However, there are sometimes
dangers that as policy discourses and instruments are
realigned towards a focus on inclusion and exclusion
rather than equality [18], priority is given to political
containment and crisis aversion rather than to the true
needs and aspirations of many segments of the population. In Canada, the predominant orientation to problems of social exclusion and inclusion within recent
social policy has shifted from a liberal welfare state in
the direction of what Banting ([19], pp. 419–423)
calls "dis-embedded liberalism" representing a refocusing of policy emphasis away from measures to
optimize income security for citizens and towards
incentives driven by labour market participation and
human capital development. These trends parallel a
broader reframing of government activity in western
welfare states from social expenditures to fiscal constraint and productive investment in productive enterprises while acknowledging the insecurity and
disruption produced through globalization and market
liberalization [18,20,21].
Federal, provincial and territorial governments in
Canada have adopted numerous policy-related measures consistent with these liberal economic tendencies. Recent federal government policies have pushed
this further by highlighting an economic agenda dominated by aggressive investment in profit-oriented
activities, especially in oil and gas extraction, mining
and other resource industries (see for example [22]),
while restricting coverage of and eligibility for various
forms of social assistance, restricting or realigning
expenditures in education and other areas, and
imposing demands for greater fiscal accountability in
First Nations and other agencies to which government
funds are transferred.
In order to offer an adequate understanding of how
processes of social inclusion and exclusion are relevant
to Indigenous populations in Canada, it is crucial to
adopt a more nuanced conception of inclusion that
takes into account Indigenous perspectives on knowledge and social engagement. This requires attention
not simply to particular segments of the population that
come to be posed as most vulnerable to marginalization and the consequences of such exclusion, but more
importantly to how such exclusion and the inequalities
in which it is embedded come to be produced and
maintained within the social alignments and discourses
that are the object of inclusive policies.
some of the conceptual and political issues not fully
elaborated within some of the most widely adopted
understandings of social inclusion in a manner that is
compatible in significant ways with Indigenous experiences and perspectives on inclusion and inequality.
Bourdieu draws attention to the observation that, while
processes of social differentiation tend to foster hierarchical social structures that are relatively stable over
time, these outcomes are neither strictly preordained
nor based on the designs of any particular group. Bourdieu is especially concerned to explore how social
actors located in specific social settings or locations
position themselves to pursue the kinds of economic,
social and cultural resources that are most highly
valued within a given field, or domain of social life,
while they are also engaged in defining the boundaries
of the field and shaping the terms and conditions, or
"rules of the game" by which the field is regulated.
Bourdieu's analysis, in common with the sociological
exploration of social inclusion, was initially oriented to
an understanding of the peculiar characteristics of
modern French society, before being extended and
adopted in a wide range of social contexts. However,
whereas this analysis of social inclusion was rooted in
Emile Durkheim's emphasis on social integration fostered
by individual adaptations to the normative and performative obligations of the social order, Bourdieu's
analysis of social fields focuses more fully on conflict
and power relations, posing a more radical critique that
suggests the way to new social possibilities (even if his
work offers relatively limited guidance as to how things
might become otherwise). The Durkheimian approach,
allowing room for a soft critique of capitalism's worst
consequences without calling for radical societal transformation [25], has tended to give way to an analytical looseness that has attracted an affinity especially
among those promoting a "new" politics emphasizing
a coalition of interests through the emergence of a
middle or "third way" alternative to more radical left
and right orientations. Social inclusion, in these policy
discourses and orientations, is a matter of public concern largely because of its implications for problems of
social cohesion and integration in a world in which
global competition has potentially undermined longstanding loyalties to communities and nation-states.
Inclusive strategies seek to reach, and reshape as
productive citizens and workers, those individuals or
groups deemed to be marginalized or disadvantaged
within existing structural arrangements or whose economic and social status has become vulnerable in the
course of dislocations produced by changing socioeconomic contexts [25,26]. While these discourses are
often linked with genuine concerns to extend social
justice and economic opportunity across the population, they also foster a temptation to pathologize risk
and focus on exclusion as a consequence of the deficit
inherent in those individuals or groups who are most
vulnerable or at-risk. The terms and conditions under
which exclusion and inclusion are determined are
4.1. Inclusion, Exclusion and Fields of Social Struggle
Pierre Bourdieu's conceptualization of social life posed
as fields of social struggle offers useful analytical tools
that are compatible with a relational understanding of
social inclusion [23,24]. It offers a way to address
25
most likely to be established by those in positions of
institutional or structural privilege rather than by
those who are deemed to be excluded.
nonetheless constituted by ongoing processes in a
dynamic, fluid manner. These processes involve social
participants who occupy distinct positions or social locations within various spheres of life, and who engage in
both strategic actions and unconscious choices influenced by their positions in conjunction with particular
configurations of social, cultural and economic resources
upon which they are able to draw. Such resources, in
turn, include not only material factors but also particular predispositions (forms of habitus) that include tacit
knowledge as well as direct insights that influence their
capacity for success in a given field. Each form of
habitus is constituted by deeply engrained perceptions
and understandings internalized though experience and
socialization, especially in early life, but also cultivated
through subsequent social positions or locations.
These differential positions and dispositions give
rise to various, sometimes changing, alliances and
oppositions as social participants within a particular
field seek to define and pursue various types of
objectives. In politics, law, education and other significant social fields, the meaning and nature of Indigenous identity and nationhood are themselves
contested, at times within the Indigenous population
as well as between Indigenous representatives and
non-Indigenous groups. The diverse social positions
and the varied experiences Indigenous people have
had in relation to policies and practices associated
with colonization, for instance (such as whether they
or their family members attended residential schools,
had treaty status, or resided on reserves), have contributed to the development of very different orientations to issues related to indigenous identity, rights
and other crucial matters. Critics who pose frequently
cited questions like "What is it that Indigenous people
want?" or "Why can't they get their acts and lives
together?" are missing the very straightforward reality
that the Indigenous population, like the wider society
of which it is part, is heterogeneous and changing,
but it is also a product of a complex cultural and colonial heritage [30,31].
Successful engagement within a given social field
depends on having the appropriate predispositions, or
habitus, required to negotiate the social relationships
and understandings considered essential or legitimate
within that field. While these may appear to be neutral
or inevitable characteristics of given domains of social
life, they are products not only of the positions people
occupy within a specific field, but also of the capacity
that people in those positions have to determine the
boundaries, relationships and rules that define the field.
The field of power is unique in that it overlaps with,
and helps configure, all other fields, including the capacity to shape how different forms of capital may or may
not be converted into one another. It is, Bourdieu
([23], p. 4) emphasizes, "the space of the relations of
force between the different kinds of capital or, more
precisely, between the agents who possess a sufficient
amount of one of the different kinds of capital to be in
4.2. The Symbolic Violence of State Policy
State policies and related discourses help to frame
national orientations to important spheres of activity,
but they can also conceal and reinforce significant
inequalities and interests. The dominant Canadian orientation to inclusion for Indigenous people, represented in the policies and pronouncements of the
federal government as well as many provincial governments, is focused strongly on labour market integration. As a budget-related document, it is not surprising
to see an economic focus in Bill C-45, but the implications of the legislation extend well beyond fiscal factors
at the same time as other policy domains are defined
predominantly in terms of economic interests. With
respect to education, for example, Canada's Department
of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development stresses
that "The Government of Canada's overarching goal is to
provide First Nation students with quality education that
provides them with the opportunity to acquire the skills
needed to enter the labour market and be full participants in a strong Canadian economy" [27]. This is a
worthy goal but it cannot be achieved without a deeper
understanding of, and action to address, the significant
historical and contemporary factors that have made it
difficult for many First Nations people to attain such
skills. The language of full participation and equal
opportunity, as posed in such policies, is not far
removed from earlier policies of assimilation and cultural displacement, while failing at the same time to
acknowledge the fundamental rights, traditions, and
forms of knowledge that are essential to the achievement of the kinds of autonomy and identities essential
to realize effective Indigenous nationhood.
This reduction of social complexity through a statemandated fiscal discourse represents what Bourdieu
characterizes as symbolic violence with reference to the
capacity within dominant groups or classes to impose
meanings and assert them as neutral and legitimate
while concealing the power relations through which
they are asserted [23]. These processes, Lamont and
Lareau ([28], p. 159) emphasize, contribute to social
exclusion by monopolizing access to privileged positions and resources, representing "a power of legitimating the claim that specific cultural norms and
practices are superior, and of institutionalizing these
claims to regulate behavior and access to resources."
Social inclusion and exclusion are not marked by
simple entry points into clearly defined or bounded
statuses or positions; rather, they represent shifting
reference points within and across particular social
realms ([29], pp. 48–50). Bourdieu ([23], pp. 31–32)
employs the notion of fields in sociological analysis in
order to highlight how social inequalities may be
reproduced over time within social structures that are
26
a position to dominate the corresponding field, whose
struggles intensify whenever the relative value of the
different kinds of capital is questioned."
This conceptual framework is instructive for understanding the status and political aspirations of Indigenous populations in Canada. Indigenous people,
widely portrayed in policy documents and social analysis as representing some of the most disadvantaged
groups within Canada, have also long promoted visions of self-determination that are not confined to
western or European-based notions of representation,
integration and success. They encompass, through
their heritage, contemporary status and aspirations,
diverse predispositions, or forms of habitus through
which they orient themselves to particular forms of
capital, that combine deep cultural values that are
aligned in disparate ways with dominant institutional
practices and values, especially when understood in
the context of Canada's dark colonial history.
These complex factors have helped to shape the
Idle No More movement, which has provided a way to
unite Indigenous people through a phenomenon that
fosters opportunities for them to articulate their distinct status as Indigenous people in relation to
demands associated with membership within the
Canadian nation while solidifying their identity through
connections with their Indigenous heritage. However,
representative of diverse social positions and political
aspirations represented among Indigenous populations, Idle No More has also been characterized by a
variety of different, and sometimes conflicting, aims
and orientations. Its proponents have articulated
clearly its vision to serve as a socially and environmentally responsible grassroots movement dedicated
to democratic practice and principles, but it has sometimes had difficulty establishing a clear public identity
because so much of the media attention and external
commentary has focused on actions of political
leaders as well as more confrontational events, such
as periodic blockages of transportation routes or
industrial sites [32].
genous communities. The purpose of Indigenous law,
as Yazzie and Zion emphasize, "is not a process to
punish or penalize people, but to teach them how to
live a better life. It is a healing process that either
restores good relationships among people or, if they do
not have good relations to begin with, fosters and
nourishes a healthy environment" ([33], p. 160). Commitment to sustaining a healthy environment is basic to
Indigenous laws. Such laws, also called teachings, are
the cornerstone of Idle No More.
According to the Cree Elder Dennis Thorne, the creator gave to Indigenous people laws to live by that
were based on selective values and teachings, such as
reciprocity, sharing and respect. The Indigenous laws
and culture are as expressed by Dennis (cited in [34],
p. 166):
I have to look at the foundation of our laws. When
the creator first put the Indigenous people on this
earth no matter what nation or what country they
were given laws to live by. According to the Cree
and the First Nations in Canada they were given a
way of life they were given instructions on how to
live they were given responsibilities on how to look
after the land, the animals, and the water. You may
hear some elders say that they were stewards of the
land. What they mean is they made an agreement
with the animals a long time ago. In the time when
they could communicate with the animals they
spoke the same language and the animals said that
they would give their lives to us to eat if we
respected them and looked after them. To give
something back, the first hunt the first kill, whether
it was animals or fish, the four legged to give something back in order to respect the life that they gave.
Dennis refers here to the spiritual connection to the
land: "they were given laws to live by", and also
points out the responsibility Indigenous people have
to "look after the land, the animals, and the water",
also indirectly illustrating the importance of protecting
the environment. Dennis maintains that:
5. Indigenous Justice and Idle No More
Today is a big issue about environment. There
wasn't from our thinking that the environment
turned out the way it did. It was from another way
of looking at life and other worldview that is not
ours so today we all have to suffer. And if we take
another look at our laws I think we can help them
understand that our laws are not based on greed...
Ours is based on good health, help, understanding
and happiness. Our laws are for those four things
only, for the survival of the people, for the survival
of medicines, the survival of animals, the winged
ones. So these laws are not only to protect the
earth, but all humans all life (cited in [34], p. 167).
In the most general sense, recognition of Indigenous
laws and culture, which are vital components of the
Idle No More movement, provide a means by which to
demonstrate alternatives that may be posed to current
official policy directions. The basic cultural orientations
of the movement are: a vision to protect the land and
water that leads to sustaining rather than exploiting the
environment; values that promote peace and social
harmony; and the attribution of a social justice dimension that includes rather than excludes the community.
Idle No More expresses Indigenous nationhood in
its broadest sense, interpreted as a community of
Indigenous people who share a common culture,
values, history, and traditions including cultural teachings and the justice practices that permeate Indi-
Subsequent notions pertaining to the environment
reveal that Indigenous laws have invariably influenced
Idle No More as the guiding principles behind the
movement.
27
John Martin, a prominent Elder from Northern Manitoba, observes that Indigenous people have a different law that is in harmony with nature:
make choices that contribute to these goals…Aboriginal laws are more about respect for every process in an ecosystem than about power over them.
Aboriginal law is the law of speaking softly, walking
humbly and acting compassionately ([35], p. 273).
There are two laws, the law of nature with the creator and the law of manmade. Anything that has to
do with nature we know we have to be careful in
how we conduct ourselves, how we treat people,
anything like that in how we treat it...You see in
life, in our way, which we are as a person, I am a
Cree they say, but for me the word Cree doesn't
mean anything to me. Being Inninew, I am a four
directions person. That's what it means, Inninew it
means four, I have my mind, my body, and also I
have a spiritual being, I have feelings (cited in
[34], p. 163).
The holistic understanding of Indigenous laws
embraces the ecosystem and the premises of harmony,
reciprocity and trust, which encourages the people to
protect the environment. In the Indigenous laws,
therefore, wholeness is present that designates respect
for nature and forms the basis of Idle No More.
These non-western conceptions of justice and law
are linked with struggles that are prompting new
understandings about what it means to be Indigenous
in a Canadian context. One of the strengths of the
Idle No More movement has been its capacity to
foster greater understandings of identity and cultural
relationships while reinvigorating Indigenous knowledge systems that have been undermined and
devalued through colonization and subsequent policies
and institutional frameworks. Connection with this cultural heritage provides a crucial basis for the recognition of Indigenous social and cultural resources that
represent, in a Bourdieuian sense, forms of capital
that are essential both as foundations for Indigenous
identity and as resources in the struggle to establish
alternatives to dominant economic and political directions in which Indigenous people and their interests
have been largely subordinated despite official
renouncement of the colonial past.
This passage by Elder John Martin demonstrates
the cultural responsibility that Indigenous people have
to respect the laws of nature, that is, corresponding
to the laws of the creator and to our commitment to
conduct ourselves for the benefit of all existence. The
way to this declaration is through our own identity
and culture. The language of the Inninew (Cree
people), in common with that of other Indigenous
people, is crucial to understanding one's identity. The
Cree word, Inninew (Cree people) for example, connotes a holistic understanding of identity. John
explains that Inninew translates as 'a four directions
person'—the mental, physical, spiritual and emotional
human domains.
For John and Dennis, Indigenous laws and values
are such that the environment is to be sustained out
of respect for the future unborn, therefore speaking to
a culture that espouses a deep connection to the
land; the connection is manifest in responsibility to
serve as "stewards of the land", a philosophy that has
survived to the present day. This connection to the
land is a core part of understanding the Idle No More
movement, which is guided by traditional teachings in
its more specific resistance to the omnibus Bill C-45
passed by the Conservative government. In short, the
Indigenous world has not forgotten its cultural laws
and values, despite the fact the Indigenous people
have experienced several generations of imperialism.
While Idle No More was initiated through Cree
understandings of law, respect for the environment
and cultural values, its rapid expansion across communities throughout Canada and beyond speaks to
these deeper responsibilities. According to the Chickasaw law scholar James Youngblood Henderson, Indigenous societies established a holistic law system that
was grounded in the ecosystem. He writes:
6. Colonialism Past and Present
Although Eurocentric historians and sociological theories of development typically interpret colonization as
bringing progress and benefit to backwards and
inferior people, in reality colonization brought great
harm to Indigenous families and communities. Elizabeth Comack notes that "European colonizers to take
control over the lives of Aboriginal people involved a
number of strategies, including the signing of treaties,
the Indian Act, the residential school system, the
North West Mounted Police played an instrumental
role in carrying out this colonial project or civilizing
mission" ([36], p. 73). Employing Bourdieu's concepts,
the colonial project was oriented to modifying the prevalent forms of habitus or dispositions within the Indigenous population while repositioning Indigenous
people relative to newcomers and authorities within
social and economic structures. Processes that served
to devalue and subordinate Indigenous knowledge
and cultural resources coexisted with policies and
practices that were exclusive in nature, producing significant inequalities or barriers to advancement with
respect to education, employment and other significant fields of social, economic and political life.
From mainstream perspectives, the era of colonialism may have ended between the late nineteenth
Most Aboriginal orders do not impose order on
relationships by establishing rules that govern general categories of acts and persons and then using
these rules to decide particular disputes. Instead
they determine that harmony; trust, sharing, and
kindness are the shared ends of the circle and then
28
and mid-twentieth centuries, when former British
colonies such as Canada, New Zealand and Australia
were granted independence. Indigenous peoples,
though, remained under colonial rule. Yazzie notes
that, "the original inhabitants of those lands, Australian
Aborigines, Maoris of New Zealand, and the First
Nations of Canada, did not get their independence"
([37], p. 43). Although post-colonial discourse claims
that colonialism is a thing of the past, Indigenous
thinkers recognize that colonialism is being continuously reproduced in various forms. Indigenous people
have experienced hundreds of years of imperialism
and social exclusion, resulting in a legacy with respect
to outcomes and social practices that have been perpetuated to the present day. Comack observes that
"colonialism has produced the social and economic
marginalization of Aboriginal people in contemporary
Canadian society" ([36], p. 81). Canada's Truth and
Reconciliation Commission, established by the federal
government in 2008 in order to investigate the activities and impact of the residential school system that
delivered education to many Indigenous children and
youth in Canada for over a century beginning in 1883,
portrays the system as a colonial "assault" on Indigenous children, families, culture, leadership, and selfgovernance that continues to shape people's total life
experience in communities across the nation ([38],
pp. 25–26). The commissioners emphasize that it is
not sufficient to know how "the schools were central
to the colonization of the Aboriginal peoples of
Canada", but, more fundamentally, we need to recognize that "the colonial framework of which they were
a central element has not been dismantled" ([39], pp.
2–3). The passage and implementation of the terms
of Bill C-45 by the federal government in 2012 without
consulting Indigenous nations represents further the
processes of colonialism and social exclusion referred
to by the commissioners. It is in this context that,
from an Indigenous perspective, Prime Minister
Stephen Harper's initial reluctance to meet with Chief
Theresa Spence and acknowledge her demands represented further distancing between government and
Indigenous positions reinforcing the exclusion of the
latter. Such unilateral decisions to dismiss or exclude
the Indigenous community while attending to other
positions are taken as typical of colonial power relations that result in reproducing the marginalization of
Indigenous people and communities.
In contrast to and in direct violation of Indigenous
principles of law, the history of Western colonialism
saw imperial states increase their power by imposing
their laws on the Indigenous societies of continents
outside Europe. A major manifestation of increasing
State rule over Indigenous people in Canada was the
criminal justice system. In her analysis of Canada's
Indigenous justice system, Sutherland demonstrates
that Western laws were used to subjugate and control
Indigenous people:
Any resistance to these laws were made illegal and
contributed to eroding indigenous political structures…it was illegal for First Nations people to go to
court to sue the Government of Canada without
previous permission from the government …Some
laws and policies were directed at the heart of First
Nations' culture and spirituality. For example gatherings such as potlatches were outlawed while
Christmas celebrations were encouraged…It was
illegal to practice traditional healing…When
attempts to disrupt economic, political, and spiritual infrastructures did not sufficiently assimilate
'Indians' children became the targets ([40], p. 6).
The passage demonstrates the role played by
imperialistic Canadian laws to colonize Indigenous
people who had no legal recourse to protect and
maintain their culture. Since all power was placed in
the colonizers' domain, Western state powers systematically overwhelmed Indigenous nations and denied
them their most basic human rights. Such domination
served not only to exclude Indigenous people from
key spaces within the core fields of public life, but was
also maintained by forms of symbolic violence that
failed to acknowledge Indigenous knowledge and
imposed new expectations about Indigenous identity,
or habitus, within a Western framework.
6.1. Shaping Indigenous Claims and Identities by
Erasing Indigenous Memory and Nationhood
Henderson shows how Canadian laws have been used
to marginalize and exclude Indigenous people,
observing that, "in Canadian thought, for example,
Aboriginal nationhood, rights, and treaties are banished from mainstream culture and law and replaced
by the theory of two founding nations: the English
and the French" ([35], p. 65). Such social exclusion is
typical of colonial practices that omit Indigenous contributions. He emphasizes, further, that colonizers aim
to "obscure Aboriginal memory. To strip Indigenous
people of their heritage and identity, the colonial education and legal systems induce collective amnesia
that alienates Indigenous peoples from their elders,
their linguistic consciousness, and their order of the
world" ([35], p. 65). We explore the erosion of Indigenous memory and the symbolic violence these processes represent with reference to examples drawn
from the fields of education and criminal justice, but
these domains are embedded within a much broader
set of dynamics. Nobles, for instance, observes with
respect to state apologies for historical injustices that
such actions seek to "alter the terms and meanings of
national membership," thereby contributing to prospects for a more inclusive society [41]. These terms,
nonetheless, are highly contested and linked to processes that, while reframing historical memory, can
also reinforce or foster exclusion in other respects.
The Idle No More movement and the widespread
29
support it has received is indication that Indigenous
memory still exists. Whereas Bill C-45 illustrates how
colonization continues in practice, if not in name, the
response it has generated in the form of Idle No More
suggests a move towards reclaiming the terrain on
which postcolonialism may be established. Yazzie
observes that:
conditions) and social factors (including access to
rights and realms such as social and political participation, civil rights, security and justice, well-being,
information and communication, and mobility, leisure
and culture) ([43], p. 40).
There are several dangers, nonetheless, in
approaching these issues too narrowly in terms of
deprivation, disadvantage and exclusion. A deficit orientation, while drawing attention to many areas in
which urgent action is necessary in order to alleviate
pressing material and social needs, is limited insofar
as it fails to take into account alternative ways in
which success, capacities and inclusion may be understood, ignoring, in the process, the forms of exclusion
entrenched within the assumptions and processes by
which indicators and outcomes associated with inclusion come to be defined and sustained.
The sometimes perplexing and confounding politics
and activities associated with the Idle No More movement are an expression of these complex relationships. As the preceding discussion of colonialism
emphasizes, the Indigenous experience in Canada has
frequently encompassed social inequality, racialization
and social exclusion. The phenomenon of over-representation by Indigenous people in the criminal justice
system, which has for several decades been the focus
of periodic inquiries and reports by governments and
other agencies in Canada, offers striking evidence of
that exclusion. Since the colonization of the Indigenous world most Indigenous peoples living in colonial societies have experienced some form of social
exclusion or racism. In an analysis of the concept of
social exclusion, sociologist Elizabeth Comack, draws a
parallel between Indigenous 'social exclusion' and
'colonialism.' There is extensive evidence of how discourses of colonialism, racism and social exclusion
have been exhibited by the police, courts and others
in the process of interpreting Indigeneity in accordance with racial constructs. Comack writes that, "Race
and racism not only pervade the everyday lives of
Aboriginal people, but also inform the wider public
discourses and institutional processes…including the
processes of law enforcement" ([36], pp. 13–14).
Postcolonialism will not arrive for Indigenous
peoples until they are able to make their own
decisions. Colonialism remains when national legislatures and policy makers make decisions for Indigenous peoples, tell them what they can and
cannot do, refuse to support them, or effectively
shut them out of the process ([37], p. 43).
Similarly, Smith advises, "Many indigenous intellectuals actively resist participating in any discussion
within the discourses of post-coloniality. This is
because post-colonialism is viewed as the convenient
invention of Western intellectuals which reinscribes
their power to define the world" ([42], p. 14). In this
context, Idle No More as a response to the Conservative government's Bill C-45 that represents, in the
face of recurring broken promises by governments to
engage in meaningful consultation with Indigenous
people on matters that concern their land, communities and people, yet another unilateral decision
that excludes Indigenous people and perspectives.
Idle No More is the manifestation of resistance to
colonialism.
7. Social Inclusion and Indigenous People in
Canada
In contrast with Europe and many other contexts, the
language of social inclusion has not been employed
widely beyond adoption by a few government departments and non-government organizations that work
with federal and provincial agencies in Canada.
Regardless of the discourse employed, however, federal, provincial and territorial governments are engaging in an extensive range of action plans in response
to serious problems confronting Indigenous populations across the nation. An ongoing series of inquiries,
studies and official documents, both before and after
the wide-sweeping Royal Commission on Aboriginal
Peoples produced its five volume report in the mid1990s, has drawn attention to the pressing need for
action on numerous fronts. Collectively, these reports
reveal Indigenous populations have a high degree of
being excluded with respect to virtually every dimension around which social inclusion and exclusion is
considered significant. Demonstrated concerns and
calls for action in Indigenous communities correspond,
for instance, with each of the factors associated with
exclusion identified by Atkinson and Marlier in a report
for the United Nations relative to both core indicators
(encompassing income and material deprivation, productive role, education status, health, and housing
7.1. Overlapping Layers of Social Regulation and
Exclusion
Indigenous people have been stereotyped as criminal
types, lazy and inferior to the mainstream, and these
gross distortions of Indigeneity are reflected in the
phenomena of racialized policing. Comack, for instance,
interviewed 78 Indigenous participants who reside in
Winnipeg's North End or inner city. What she found in
the participants' collective narrative was the commonly held notion that Winnipeg police officers have
routinely racialized, degraded and dehumanized Indigenous people. Comack observes, "Aboriginal men are
regularly stopped by police, sometimes on a weekly
basis, and asked to account for themselves" ([36], p.
30
210). The same racial stereotyping is demonstrated
when police assume that Indigenous males are drug
dealers or gangsters while Indigenous women are
seen as prostitutes ([36], p. 25). In fact, participants
reported that the police have referred to them in
terms of 'squaw', 'dirty Indian', or 'fuckin Indian'.
These kinds of insults are a powerful means of
degrading Indigenous people. However, reinforcing
the limited social and cultural capital to combat such
symbolic violence, Comack's participants were powerless to do much about because Indigenous people are
viewed as not credible and their complaints on police
misconduct are not taken seriously.
The racialization of Indigenous people has invariably led to social exclusion from society's core institutions, including employment, education, housing,
policing, and many other sites. Imperialism and racialization in the criminal justice system has been an
important factor contributing to over-representation of
Indigenous people in the justice system: its tools were
the police, courts and racialization. The Canadian
Criminal Justice Association observes that Indigenous
people, "especially in the north spend less time with
their lawyers...are less likely to have legal representation in court proceedings…and they often plead guilty
because they feel intimidated by court proceedings
and want them over with" ([44], p. 38). These kinds
of practices demonstrate that the criminal justice
system treats Indigenous people as marginal and
therefore helps to explain their over-representation in
the prisons. A federal report released in 2012 reveals
that Indigenous men and women are significantly
over-represented in Canada's federal penitentiaries;
according to Howard Sapers, Canada's ombudsman
for incarcerated human beings, these proportions are
expanding rapidly, especially in the Prairie Provinces
where Indigenous people are most highly concentrated: "Of the growth, 52 per cent has come from
the Prairies. It's the fastest-growing region in the
country and aboriginal offenders account for most of
the increase and account for 43 per cent of the
offenders in that region" [45,46].
It has been said of the prison system that it
obstructs the potential for healing and therefore
reproduces a cycle of crime. As Braithwaite advises:
recidivism" and "longer sentences may increase
recidivism" ([48], pp. 9–41). The Commission goes on
to state that "Canada is a world leader in incarcerating
118 per 100,000 general population" ([48, p. 9–41).
In its tendency to remove people from community and
social participation, especially in the absence of programs and initiatives to foster reintegration in the
community upon release, it is clear that the criminal
justice system does not advance social inclusion as a
priority in its dealings with Indigenous offenders.
These patterns are consistent with what Michel
Foucault recognized more generally as the failure of
prisons in observing that "those leaving prison have
more chance than before of going back to it; convicts
are, in a very high proportion, former inmates" ([49],
p. 265). Foucault maintains that the "prison cannot
fail to produce delinquents by imposing violent constraints on its inmates; it is supposed to apply law,
and to teach respect for it; but all its functioning operates in the form of an abuse of power" ([49], p. 266).
These phenomena represent more widely observed
disconnections that Indigenous people often encounter
between predispositions developed early in life, rooted
in their family and cultural heritage, and those
expected or expressed in relationships with dominant
Canadian institutions. Even concepts related to social
inclusion, rooted in Western epistemologies tend to
diverge from discourses associated with Indigenous
people and their experiences. Consequently, there are
limits to the extent to which these concepts, and
especially the methodologies employed to determine
indices of social inclusion and exclusion, are able to
encompass important dimensions of Indigenous
people's realities. Responding to panel presentations
at a conference on social inclusion in Canada, for
instance, Inuit audience members observed particular
actions or statuses in northern Indigenous social contexts take on different meanings than when interpreted from a southern, urban vantage point:
One pointed out that when Inuit drop out of high
school, they often go out on the land and provide
for their people in a valuable way, but this is not
captured in the research. She added that Inuit are
not highly represented in post-secondary education
because going to a southern university is like going
to a different country for Inuit—and because it is
not their tradition for parents to provide for this
education. The participants stressed that Inuit as
well as other Aboriginal people must be a part of
all policy, research and legislation [50].
Prisons are schools for crime; offenders learn new
skills for the illegitimate labor market in prison and
become more deeply enmeshed in criminal subcultures. Prison can be an embittering experience that
leaves offenders more angry at the world than
when they went in ([47], p. 1738).
This passage demonstrates that the formal high
school education is irrelevant to some Inuit who drop
out in high numbers in comparison to the mainstream.
The Canadian middle class standards and ideals mean
little to the practical life of the Inuit and other
northern Indigenous learners. We would have to see
that the basis of mainstream schools, which is to
teach the language, values and culture of the colon-
For Braithwaite the prison experience develops
crime skills and increases bitterness therefore it is not
surprising that recidivism rates are high. To be more
concrete, The Commission on First Nations and Métis
Peoples and Justice Reform observes that "empirical
evidence in the U.S., Canada, and Europe over the
last 30 years shows longer sentences do not reduce
31
izer, at the same time treats the culture, language and
ways of the Inuit as marginal. Therefore, it is not surprising that the Inuit youth see little connection
between the subjects taught in the high school and
their practical life in the community. In other words,
the situation represents a mismatch between curriculum and Inuit society. In mainstream society education conveys learners' goals for employment and
success. However, the Inuit youth see their responsibilities to provide for their people by going out on the
land as more relevant than sitting in a classroom.
Since they are concerned for the future well-being of
their communities these Inuit youth drop out of high
school. Understood in this way, the problem lies not
so much with the youth as with the difficulties posed
for them to identify with the education system
provided by the colonizer and which has historically
been used to force Indigenous people to deny their
own culture and assimilate into the mainstream. Perhaps the youth just want to be themselves, that is, to
live on the land and continue life as Indigenous
peoples. In any case, many of the old people still
teach the youth the importance of being able to 'walk
in two worlds.' This is in part the foundation of a
vision established over four decades ago in which
Canadian First Nations articulated principles of "Indian
control of Indian education" [51] in order to integrate
the kinds of education required for success in the contemporary world with appreciation for the kinds of traditional Indigenous values and practices that might
encourage youth to spend time on the land as part of
a socially inclusive curriculum.
and other critical infrastructure needs were not
adequately documented [52].
These developments have provoked extensive rhetoric across both mainstream and social media sites,
often denigrating both individuals like Spence and
Indigenous people more generally for their apparent
sense of entitlement, irresponsibility, and lack of
accountability. Comments like the following draw upon
and reinforce stereotypical opinions concerning Indigenous people based on racialized assumptions using
meritocracy as the standard.
[My] house doesnt rot because i take care of it
because i worked for it. Not the goverments job.
That reserve has recieves over $425 million from
the federal goverment and the mine there blocking.
Calling people names and saying they dont understsnd doesnt do much to help your position (sic
[53]).
There is nothing wrong with Bill C-45. Everyone
calls for Accountability by the government but generally we as citizens forget we need to be accountable for our own lives. The Government's job is not
to find you a job, feed your kids and buy you a
house. It's [sic] job is to ensure our economy is
strong enough for you to do that on your own [54].
It's all great that people want more, but generally
people don't hold themselves accountable…Free
giveaways will not help the country, we all have to
do our part [55].
Stereotypes rooted in colonial power relations remain
embedded with these comments, akin to the pervasive
inequalities observed in the previous section regarding
the criminal justice system. The denigration of Indigenous people as lazy, apathetic and indifferent both
ignores and reinforces the impact of longstanding
experiences of systemic discrimination and colonization.
The racialized interpretations continue colonial practices
("blaming the victim", "divide and conquer") that criticize Indigenous people for their impoverishment while
embracing the misguided premise that Canada is a
meritocracy in which social and economic status are
presumed to have little to do with race, class and
gender in the reproduction of social inequality. Indigenous people are portrayed in these discourses as
dependent on government largesse and are otherwise
deserving of nothing else than the direction to take
responsibility for their own "problems".
At the same time, Idle No More has fostered alternative discourses and social alignments. The highly
charged racialized discourses have created opportunities to raise consciousness among Indigenous people
and other Canadians regarding the impact of racism
as well as the conditions which have fostered it. Idle
No More is a movement that has been spurred and
embraced most strongly by relatively young and articulate segments of the Indigenous population who are
adept at integrating educational success and the
8. Idle No More: Struggles to Reposition
Indigenous Representations and Rights
One of the paradoxical features of the Idle No More
movement has been its capacity to forge strong linkages as well as divisions. Some critics have dismissed
Idle No More as a form of Indigenous radicalism that
is hostile to the interests of other Canadians. Although
more sharply focused than the earlier Occupy movements in New York and many other cities, Idle No
More has also exposed some parallel internal divisions
and divergent interests among its participants. Much
of the media attention was focused on Chief Theresa
Spence, who initiated the high profile hunger strike (or
low liquid diet), and the other formal leaders of First
Nations organizations across the country who variously
led or protested meetings with senior Canadian government officials. This exposure heightened the profile
given to several important priorities and grievances
within Indigenous communities, but it also fostered
images of internal bickering, indecisiveness and hypocrisy. Information based on an audit requested by the
federal government was leaked to media outlets suggesting that Spence and other band counsellors were
highly remunerated at a time in which large amounts of
band spending intended to address education, housing
32
powers of social media with experiences and lessons
derived from previous generations. As a consequence,
the core activities such as maintenance of a website
and Facebook page and organization of public events
are predominantly urban-based while the movement
has been highly successful in mobilizing support from
a wide spectrum of Indigenous and non-Indigenous
communities. The spirit of the movement is perhaps
best exemplified in the initiative undertaken by a
group of young people who walked 1600 kilometres
from their Cree community in northern Quebec to
Ottawa in winter conditions to draw awareness to
social conditions in Indigenous communities and
reconnect with their land and heritage. The group,
which began with seven walkers, had increased to as
many as four hundred by the time it was greeted by
thousands of cheering supporters on its arrival in
Ottawa in late March. Some of the group members
indicated that the walk had helped them address serious personal issues such as depression and suicidal
thoughts [56]. The march also proved inspiration for
many others across the nation, as reflected in blog
commentaries on media reports such as the following:
as a manifestation of Indigenous values and its fundamental teaching to take care of the land and water.
The focal points for the movement, however, reach
well beyond a single piece of legislation and the
manner in which it was implemented.
We have discussed Idle No More with reference to
diverse frameworks and bodies of literature, including
the analysis of social inclusion, Bourdieu's concepts of
habitus, field and forms of capital, and Indigenous
conceptions of knowledge and justice in order to
understand the potential implications the movement
has for Indigenous people and for Canadian society.
Inclusion has different meanings and implications for
diverse populations, representing differential positioning within relations of power as well as in
struggles to define and gain access to the kinds of
social and cultural resources that influence the kinds
of social, economic and political positions occupied by
members of these populations. For Canada's Indigenous people, these issues have often been posed as
making a choice or being forced to shed Indigenous
identity and cultural roots or risk being marginalized,
despite a legal framework that recognizes Indigenous
rights and nationhood. The falseness of this dichotomy and what it represents is belied by a historical
experience of colonization and more recent barriers to
meaningful social and economic participation, combined with a political environment in which Indigenous
rights are ignored or remain contested.
The phenomena described in this paper point to a
double failure, on the part of governments and other
official agencies, but they also suggest the emergence
of dual promise. They reveal, at the same time, the
importance of understanding and approaching social
inclusion as a complex, multidimensional phenomenon
that is defined and approached in diverse and sometimes conflicting ways by different populations. Some
of Canada's Indigenous people are gaining entry into
and prominence within the social, economic and political structures of Canadian society, but substantial
barriers continue to limit the extent to which full inclusion has been possible for the majority of Indigenous
people. Government policies and the practices related
to them have persistently fallen short both in fostering
conditions by which Indigenous people have been
able to gain meaningful engagement in many aspects
of Canadian life and in providing a solid foundation on
which Indigenous aspirations for self-determination
can be fulfilled. They have also rekindled counter-discourses grounded in misunderstanding of these relationships, often reinforcing hostility and overt racism.
The promise, by contrast, lies with the awakening in
the communities, potentially drawing together youth
and elders, reaching across an extensive breadth of
the Indigenous experience in Canada, ranging from
upwardly mobile urban professionals, seasonal
resource industry workers and those who have given
up hope of meaningful employment, communities
whose lives depend on relations with the land, victims
I am impressed by these young people. What a
journey! I love how they found a way to demonstrate their beliefs—it connects them to their culture (the route and way of traveling) and the land
to their protest. It will have long term positive
affects [sic] on their lives. I wish them all well and
safe travels [57].
Congrats! All young should witness this courage,
endurance and sense of community. I hope this
experience showed them what great opportunities
can lie ahead in this great land [58].
While not all comments were as supportive or positive, the initial responses suggest that educational
moments have created opportunities to embrace a
pathway towards the kinds of meaningful inclusion
Indigenous people are seeking in the Canadian context.
9. Conclusion
Although the Idle No More movement seems to have
disappeared from the media, it is in fact very much
alive and vital in and beyond Indigenous communities.
Idle No More has not disappeared but has demonstrated its deep roots as part of an established system
of cultural teachings and values that advocate respect
for the environment that has been continuously reproduced to the present time. Idle No more speaks of
modern Indigenous interpretations of development
that are rooted in the ideology of future wellbeing of
succeeding generations. Indigenous peoples across
Canada and their supporters in many nations openly
protested against Bill-C-45 because of the importance
of sustaining the environment within Indigenous cultures and knowledge systems, revealing Idle No More
33
of abuse and criminalization, and many others. By
drawing attention to these issues, even in the face of
negative criticism, they have helped foster dialogue
and understanding that are essential for moving forward in validating Indigenous knowledge and identities and clarifying and achieving a nation to nation
arrangement. While the directions and outcomes
associated with these dialogues remain highly uncertain, they highlight what must occur in order for any
effective, progressive change with respect to Indigenous people's status in relation to Canadian society.
There are dangers that Idle No More may fragment
regardless of how governments and other agencies
respond to it, akin to the failure experienced by
numerous previous efforts to bring together and
respond adequately to the voices of those who represent the full diversity of Indigenous positions and
perspectives. At the same time, there are signs that it
can be as resilient as the Indigenous knowledge and
traditions that were not extinguished by colonialism,
in part because it is deeply informed by and respectful
of those traditions, while at the same time mobilizing
and motivating younger generations. It suggests a
way forward, to the extent that the authority
grounded in Indigenous knowledge can be integrated
with the kinds of legitimacy accorded a cohort of Indigenous people moving into influential positions within
Canadian institutional life while seeking validation of
their rights and heritage as Indigenous people. It also
requires that we pay careful attention to the changing
positions of and coalitions engaged in by Indigenous
people and their allies in terms of their significance for
Canadian and other societies.
As a movement and culture challenging the
destruction of the environment, Idle No More builds
upon people's sense of humanity that emerges from a
conscious awareness of natural laws and the realization that Indigenous peoples have suffered unjustly
from social exclusion and colonization. It has practical
and political significance for the choices and directions
taken by the Canadian state and its people, with the
potential to inform specific policy deliberations as well
as the understanding of relations of ruling and resistance that shape these options. As a grassroots social
movement, its genesis and direction can inform and
be informed in a reflexive manner by the variously
failed or successful trajectories of other major social
movements in North America and other parts of the
world (see, e.g., [59]). It obliges us to acknowledge
and act upon our responsibilities, as people who represent one or the other party to living treaties, while
focusing our attention at the same time to our wider
responsibilities as human beings. For those interested
in questions of social inclusion, it points to complex
questions that researchers and policy-makers in many
contexts must pay attention to regarding who defines
inclusion and what inclusion signifies for those in different social and economic positions.
The movement reminds us that any future research
agenda concerning Indigenous social inclusion and
exclusion has a responsibility to uphold Indigenous
perspectives. Traditional knowledge and cultural
resources, along with longstanding responsibilities to
the land, resources and other people, lie at the core
of those perspectives. We have observed Idle No
More's capacity for unity, despite the efforts of participants and observers both within and outside the
movement to steer it in various alternate directions.
The movement has shown that Indigenous people are
conscious of their inherent laws and demonstrated
that a profound responsibility is to uphold those laws
for the benefit of future generations. It has mobilized
young generations in unique ways, stirring new
interest in the teachings of the elders and their relevance for today. Idle No More has demonstrated the
need to promote open communication between governments, Indigenous people and mainstream Canadian citizens. For academic researchers as well as
political observers, ongoing attention is needed to
explore both the roots and possible futures of the
movement and the kinds of influence, if any, it will
generate over time. It reminds us that the achievement of inclusion can only be understood in terms of
the capacity to incorporate and offer validation for a
variety of perspectives, experiences and socioeconomic outcomes all oriented to the objective to foster
a viable and sustainable way of living.
References and Notes
provisions of the budget tabled on March 29, 2012
and other measures. Ottawa, Canada: Parliament of
Canada; 14 December 2012.
4. United Nations. United Nations Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. New York, NY, USA:
United Nations; 2008.
5. Houle SM. INM: Seeing Only Bill C-45 Helps
Harper's Plans Be Realized. Idle No More website. 5
May 2013. Available from: http://idlenomore.ca/articl
es/resources/selected-readings/item/222-inm-seeing-o
nly-bill-c-45-helps-harper%E2%80%99s-plans-be-real
ized (accessed on 27 May 2013).
6. Cannon M, Sunseri L, editors. Racism, Colonial-
1. Coulthard G. Idle No More in Historical Context.
Decolonization: Indigineity, Colonization and Resistance. 24 December 2012. Available from: http://decol
onization.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/idlenomore-in-hi
storical-context/#more-50 (accessed on 13 February
2013).
2. Gordon J. Manifesto. Idle No More. 13 January
2013. Available from: http://idlenomore.ca/about-us
(accessed on 28 May 2013).
3. Parliament of Canada. Statutes of Canada 2012.
Chapter 31. A second act to implement certain
34
ism, and Indigeneity in Canada: A Reader. Don Mills,
ON, Canada: Oxford University Press; 2011.
7. Garner R, Carrière G, Sanmartin C. Longitudinal
Health and Administrative Data Research Team. The
Health of First Nations Living Off-Reserve, Inuit, and
Métis Adults in Canada: The Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Inequalities in Health. Ottawa,
Canada: Minister of Industry, Statistics Canada; 2010.
8. Wotherspoon T. Aboriginal People, Public Policy,
and Social Differentiation in Canada. In: Juteau D,
editor. Social Differentiation: Patterns and Processes.
Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press; 2003.
pp. 155–204.
9. Usalcas J. Aboriginal People and the Labour
Market: Estimates from the Labour Force Survey,
2008–2010. Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada Labour
Statistics Division; 2011.
10. Lutz JS. Makuk: A New History of AboriginalWhite Relations. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press; 2009.
11. Adams H. Prison of Grass: Canada from the
Native Point of View. Toronto, Canada: New Press;
1975.
12. Alfred T. Peace, Power, Righteousness: An
Indigenous Manifesto, 2nd ed. Don Mills, Canada:
Oxford University Press; 2009.
13. Denis JS. Transforming Meanings and Group
Positions: Tactics and Framing in Anishinaabe–White
Relations in Northwestern Ontario, Canada. Ethnic and
Racial Studies. 2012;35(3):453–470.
14. Bird J, Land L, Macadam M, editors. Nation to
Nation: Aboriginal Sovereignty and the Future of
Canada. Toronto, Canada: Irwin Publishing; 2002.
15. Helin C. Dances with Dependency: Out of
Poverty through Self-Reliance. Woodland Hills, CA,
USA: Ravencrest; 2008.
16. Yashar DJ. Contesting Citizenship in Latin
America: The Rise of Indigenous Movements and the
Postliberal Challenge. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press; 2005.
17. Hedetoft UR. Social Inclusion: Inaugural
Editorial. Social Inclusion. 2013;1(1):1–2.
18. Giddens A. The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Malden, MA, USA: Polity Press; 1998.
19. Banting KG. Dis-Embedding Liberalism? The
New Social Policy Paradigm in Canada. In: Green DA,
Kesselman, JR, editors. Dimensions of Inequality in
Canada. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press; 2006. pp.
417–452.
20. Esping-Andersen G. A Welfare State for the
21st Century. In: Giddens A, editor. The Global Third
Way Debate. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press; 2001. pp.
134–156.
21. Lister R. Strategies for Social Inclusion: Promoting Social Cohesion or Social Justice? In: Askonas
P, Stewart A, editors. Social Inclusion: Possibilities and
Tensions. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Press; 2000. pp.
37–54.
22. Government of Canada. Responsible Resource
Development—Overview. Canada's Economic Action
Plan. 2013. Available from: http://actionplan.gc.ca/en/
page/r2d-dr2/overview (accessed on 29 March 2013).
23. Bourdieu P. The New Capital. Appendix: Social
Space and Field of Power. In: Bourdieu P. Practical
Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford, CA, USA:
Stanford University Press; 1998. pp. 31–34.
24. Bourdieu P, Passeron J-C. Reproduction in
Education, Society and Culture. Beverly Hills, CA, USA:
Sage; 1979.
25. Levitas R. The Inclusive Society? Social Exclusion and New Labour, 2nd ed. Basingstoke, UK:
Palgrave Macmillan; 2005.
26. Daly M, Silver H. Social Exclusion and Social
Capital: A Comparison and Critique. Theory and
Society. 2008;37(6):537–566.
27. Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern
Development Canada. Education. Available from:
http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100033601/1
100100033605 (accessed on 24 May 2013).
28. Lamont M, Lareau A. Cultural Capital: Allusions, Gaps and Glissandos in Recent Theoretical Developments. Sociological Theory. 1988;6(5):153–168.
29. Lareau A, Horvat EM. Moments of Social
Inclusion and Exclusion: Race, Class, and Cultural
Capital in Family-School Relationships. Sociology of
Education. 1999;72(1):37–53.
30. King T. The Inconvenient Indian: A Curious
Account of Native People in America. Toronto,
Canada: Doubleday Canada; 2012.
31. Palmater PD. Beyond Blood: Rethinking
Indigenous Identity. Saskatoon, SK, Canada: Purich
Publishing; 2011.
32. Hawboldt A. Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood:
Idle No More Founder Sets the Record Straight. Verb
2013;228(February):4–5.
33. Yazzie R, Zion JW. Navajo Restorative Justice:
The Law of Equity and Harmony. In: Galway B,
Hudson J, editors. Restorative Justice: International
Perspectives. Monsey, NY, USA: Criminal Justice Press;
1996. pp. 157–174.
34. Hansen JG. An Exploration of Swampy Cree
Restorative Justice. PhD Thesis, Department of Curriculum Studies in Education, University of Regina, SK,
Canada; 2010.
35. Henderson JY. Postcolonial Ledger Drawing:
Legal Reform. In: Battiste M, editor. Reclaiming
Indigenous Voice and Vision. Vancouver, BC, Canada:
UBC Press; 2000. pp. 161–171.
36. Comack E. Racialized Policing: Aboriginal
People's Encounters with the Police. Halifax, Canada:
Fernwood Publishing; 2012.
37. Yazzie R. Indigenous Peoples and Postcolonial
Colonialism. In: Battiste M, editor. Reclaiming
Indigenous Voice and Vision. Vancouver, BC, Canada:
UBC Press; 2000. pp. 39–49.
38. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of
Canada. Interim Report. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: Truth
and Reconciliation Commission of Canada; 2012.
39. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.
35
They Came for the Children: Canada, Aboriginal Peoples,
and Residential Schools. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: Truth
and Reconciliation Commission of Canada; 2012.
40. Sutherland J. Colonialism, Crime, and Dispute
Resolution: A Critical Analysis of Canada's Aboriginal
Justice Strategy. 2002. Available from: http://www.me
diate.com/articles/sutherlandJ.cfm (accessed on 5
May 2008).
41. Nobles M. The Politics of Official Apologies.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
42. Smith LT. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London, UK: Zed
Books; 1999.
43. Atkinson AB, Marlier E. Analysing and
Measuring Social Inclusion in a Global Context. New
York, NY, USA: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs; 2010.
44. Canadian Criminal Justice Association. Aboriginal Peoples and the Criminal Justice System. 2000.
Available from: www.ccja-acjp.ca/en/aborit.html (accessed on 13 January 2003).
45. Brosnahan M. Record-high Prison Numbers
Sparking Violence. CBC News. 27 August 2012.
Available from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/
2012/08/27/prison-numbers-crowding.html (accessed
on 18 September 2012).
46. Office of the Correctional Investigator, Government of Canada. Spirit Matters: Aboriginal People
and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. Final
Report. Ottawa, Canada: Office of the Correctional
Investigator of Canada; 2012.
47. Braithwaite J. A Future Where Punishment Is
Marginalized: Realistic or Utopian? UCLA Law Review.
1999;46(6):1727–1750.
48. Commission on First Nations and Métis People
and Justice Reform. Legacy of Hope: An Agenda for
Change. Final Report Volume 1. 2004. Available from:
www.justicereformcomm.sk.ca (accessed on 14 March
2013).
49. Foucault M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth
of the Prison. New York, USA: Vintage Books; 1977.
50. Canadian Council on Social Development. Social Inclusion and Communities at Risk: Canada's Aboriginal Peoples. 2003 Social Inclusion Conference
Proceedings. Available from: http://www.ccsd.ca/ev
ents/inclusion/proceedings/aboriginal.htm (accessed on
13 February 2013).
51. National Indian Brotherhood. Indian Control of
Indian Education. Ottawa, Canada: National Indian
Brotherhood [Assembly of First Nations]; 1972.
52. By contrast, relatively little media was focused
on observations within the audit report that there had
been some improvement in financial accounting
practices during Spence's term as Chief. See: Schwartz
D. Inside Attawapiskat's financial troubles. CBC News.
9 January 2013. Available from: http://www.cbc.ca/
news/canada/story/2013/01/09/f-attawapiskat-finance
s-faq.html (accessed on 30 May 2013).
53. "LM". Posted on Entitled No More Facebook
page. Available from: https://www.facebook.com/whe
resthemoneygoing (accessed on 12 February 2013).
54. "Sean". Posted on CBC Live Blog. Available
from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/01/
30/politics (accessed on 30 January 2013).
55. "Guest". Posted on CBC Live Blog. Available
from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/01/
30/politics (accessed on 30 January 2013).
56. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC).
Cree walkers speak at Parliament Hill after Idle No
More trek: 'Journey of the People' ends with crowds
cheering aboriginal youth. Available from: http://www.
cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2013/03/25/ottawa
-walk-nishiyuu-journey-ends-ottawa-parliament-victori
a.html (accessed on 25 March 2013).
57. "Philip". Posted on CBC Live Blog. Available
from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/
2013/03/25/ottawa-walk-nishiyuu-journey-ends-ottaw
a-parliament-victoria.html (accessed on 25 March
2013).
58. "Lraymond". Posted on CBC Live Blog. Available from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/st
ory/2013/03/25/ottawa-walk-nishiyuu-journey-e
nds-ottawa-parliament-victoria.html (accessed on 25
March 2013).
59. Wood LJ. Direct Action, Deliberation, and
Diffusion: Collective Action after the WTO Protests in
Seattle. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University
Press; 2012.
36